Rossi-Blog Comment Discussion

    • Official Post

    @Bob.


    Thank you for your kind offer of support. I am going to the demo, no NDA about that, but it is a requirement that the place and exact date remain confidential until Andrea Rossi makes them public. It's all booked, and looks like costing me around £900/1000 if I want to eat and drink anything. Email me via '[email protected]' if you (or anyone) wish to help financially, every little helps. I'm going with a real academic heavyweight and hope to use the opportunity to organise an 'impossible physics' university symposium on LENR and EmDrive with demos sometime in 2018. But whatever happens to that plan, I will write my visit up as fully as possible and post it in here.

  • I'm going with a real academic heavyweight...


    Again, it needs only people that really understand of thermodynamics, skilled and expert of thermal and electrical measurement able to perform a good MFC, this means good professional engineers, not other professors, academics... moreover people not already convinced like some fusionists,


    Ask to Rossi if he would like these persons and accept to demo in front of them his "miracle-masterpiece"!:D


    Quote

    hope to use the opportunity to organise an 'impossible physics' university symposium on LENR and EmDrive with demos sometime in 2018


    Still chatters and promises of fusionists, do a demo right now if you really have something in hand (I don't believe).

  • Rossi is as black and white as it gets. Hand holding? When Rossi got a hold of Darden, it wasn't his hand he was holding. There can not be "improved" technology because during his entire life, Rossi has never had even a shadow, a soupçon, a vestige, a ghost, an infinitesimal portion of "technology."

    Rossi is a con man,

    he saw a mark, Darden, and he took him down, that’s what he does,

    pretty simple really.

  • @Bob.


    Thank you for your kind offer of support. I am going to the demo, no NDA about that, but it is a requirement that the place and exact date remain confidential until Andrea Rossi makes them public. It's all booked, and looks like costing me around £900/1000 if I want to eat and drink anything. Email me via '[email protected]' if you (or anyone) wish to help financially, every little helps. I'm going with a real academic heavyweight and hope to use the opportunity to organise an 'impossible physics' university symposium on LENR and EmDrive with demos sometime in 2018. But whatever happens to that plan, I will write my visit up as fully as possible and post it in here.

    Excellent! Email is on the way.


    Can you share any other information, such as did you have to sign an NDA about the demo itself?

    I.E. will you be able to report freely what you observe such as setup, methods, controls, who attended, etc. etc.

    Can you disclose if you will be able to inspect equipment first hand or if this is strictly a "from the sidelines" event?

    Was this invitation from Rossi himself or through an intermediary?


    So many questions!


    I must say, I was initially yawning at this demo announcement. Rossi always disappoints and I had no hopes that this one would be any different. However, now that you are attending,

    hopefully we can have an independent set of eyes on the scene. It will be very interesting what that set of eyes sees or is allowed to see!


    Thanks again! :thumbup:


  • There are people here who against all probability seem to think there is some chance that Rossi has a partly-working device. Accepting that as a premise (understanding its implausibility) we can ask whether the movement from cats to quacks is that to an improved device. The original e-cat was pretty bomb-proof. Low temperatures, simple, nothing to go wrong, and according to Rossi high COP. The Dorral device was similar. The Lugano (next generation) hot-cat worked less well and required high temperatures, all of which made it less robust. The Quack-X has a completely different mode of operation from all that went before: gaseous plasma in envelope vs solid (liquified during operation) fuel. It would, if it worked, no doubt have completely different engineering challenges.


    I'm going with a real academic heavyweight


    Feynman was a real academic with a very broad understanding of engineering and the ability to use theory from 1st principles to describe new systems. He was exceptional, and not at all typical of academics, nor of people generally.


    To check a Rossi test you need somone used to working with an analysing the type of system used for the calorimetry. That is not likely to be an academic. Heavy weight is not required, outstanding practical engineering skills and very solid undergraduate-level maths and physics are.


  • Have you read Alans posts in the past? He himself is capable to judge the equipment or to ask the right questions about the equipment used in the demonstration. Experts skilled in thermal and electrical measurement wont add any information to the infos we get from Alan. They could add information if they were allowed to test the E-cat with their own equipment. But that is never going to happen - not in a Rossi demo. I think with Alan as a "watchman on the wall" we have all we could ask for.

    • Official Post

    A question to people with exceptional logic. Since your logic led to the conclusion that Rossi is cold blooded master or scam, where is the logic in having another demo and replaying the old tricks?

    Will you reclassify him as a serial maniacal scammer?

    Just in case, always slim odds, I would be thinking how to maintain the face in case of a positive demo.

  • Have you read Alans posts in the past? He himself is capable to judge the equipment or to ask the right questions about the equipment used in the demonstration. Experts skilled in thermal and electrical measurement wont add any information to the infos we get from Alan. They could add information if they were allowed to test the E-cat with their own equipment. But that is never going to happen - not in a Rossi demo. I think with Alan as a "watchman on the wall" we have all we could ask for.


    Alan is a great friend of the most Italian supporter of Rossi. I never read by him technical criticisms about the flawed tests of Rossi (on the contrar other fusionists have done), so do not confuse a good and independent engineer (really skilled) with a simple cheering role of who is already convinced.

  • Alan is fair-minded and an independent thinker and has a relevant technical background. As far as I can tell, has not already made up his mind one way or the other about Rossi's claims and tech, but instead keeps an open mind (which is more than I can say for myself). He is most unlikely to be able to carry out the kinds of controls and checks needed to verify anything that Rossi says at the demo. But we can assume that he at least will be in a position to spot any obvious flaws from a distance.

  • Reclassify him? Why, he's always the same of before.


    In case of positive demo? Positive demo result is already sure before! :D As ever in the past, see old presentations, 1MW Plant shows, Hot-Cat, TPRs...

  • Alan is fair-minded and an independent thinker and has a relevant technical background. As far as I can tell, has not already made up his mind one way or the other about Rossi's claims and tech, but instead keeps an open mind (which is more than I can say for myself). He is most unlikely to be able to carry out the kinds of controls and checks needed to verify anything that Rossi says at the demo. But we can assume that he at least will be in a position to spot any obvious flaws from a distance.


    Really? Explain how he (Alan) will control, check and verify what Rossi says at the demo from "distance" recognizing the flaws (remember that the King of Hoax is expert of smoke in the eyes).


    Did he write, define a test document, impose a good test method and test protocol?

    Will he conduct the tests?

    Will he build the test set-up?

    Will he bring all the instruments?


    I think that if a mind is too much open the brain fly away because already convinced.

  • But you also said that Alan (from distance) is able to see flaws. My questions of before are: how?

    Rossi is not a beginner in theatre and staging.

  • I said Alan will be able to see obvious flaws from a distance. How? Because any flaws that are obvious will be obvious. He will presumably not be able to see flaws that are not obvious, which would require checks and controls to identify.

  • @THH. (and Henry) Thank you for your wise advice. I will pass it on. @Bob. No NDA mentioned, direct invite, but I will respect any requests for confidentiality that are to do with personal privacy from other attendees and are not directly related. No restrictions of any kind on relating what I observe have been mentioned.

    I can appreciate the sincerity of respecting other attendant's privacy. Hopefully they will not require such, as knowing who attended and then what they may or may not say can speak volumes.


    I am greatly surprised (pleasantly so) that Rossi did not clamp down complete NDA's on you. ( However, I guess you might have to sign one when you arrive!?! ) If not, then I must give Rossi credit. Good for him.


    While Rossi himself has trashed his credibility with me from his past actions, I guess this is a chance to at least start the path to restoring it. If he allows you and others real observations, then this will be very interesting indeed. If he makes everyone stand 10 feet back and no one can inspect any test apparatus, then I am unsure what value it will be. I am anxious to hear your report!


    Can you state if the "direct invite" was a conversation or an electronic one? I would be interested if you had a conversation, if you could describe the general dialog you had with Rossi?


    I am curious if Dewey Weaver still visits here. If so, I would like to ask if he was present at any of Rossi's early "demos" to IH. If so, could he describe them? It would be interesting to see if Alan sees any similar practices or if this demo will be truly different? :/

  • How? Because they're obvious.


    If flaws were only obvious ones, Alan or another there it would be the same. Anyway the KoH is a good actor able to fascinate "open-minds" of who (like Alan) still give him credibility.

  • Just in case, always slim odds, I would be thinking how to maintain the face in case of a positive demo.

    I think this reveals a real deficit in understanding how to approach these things. I am a Rossi skeptic, but nonetheless if a convincing demonstration of the reality of Rossi's systems could be made then I would be tickled pink! There is no real question of saving face. It is more a question of having curiosity satisfied and wanting to know what is true and what isn't.


    I don't see Alan's trip as decisive. It could take weeks of measurement and analysis with unimpeded access before arriving at an informed conclusion, and I don't think this is in the cards. Also, the person who accompanies Alan shouldn't be an academic heavyweight, it should be someone with experience in staging illusions. Scientists know all bout science but they intrinsically used to trusting other researchers to be honest. I don't think Mr Rossi can be extended that courtesy.

    • Official Post

    This is rather reminiscent of an unwinnable argument. If I said my fellow visitor was an engineer, someone else would demand a scientist, If he was a magician somebody else would demand a ventriloquist, if an academic the some would want Joe the Plumber. It is what it is, And I quite agree with Bruce__H . This isn't likely to be decisive in terms of what is shown, however, converstions in the 'smoke filled rooms' associated with these events may prove to be highly illuminating.

Subscribe to our newsletter

It's sent once a month, you can unsubscribe at anytime!

View archive of previous newsletters

* indicates required

Your email address will be used to send you email newsletters only. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

Our Partners

Want To Advertise or Sponsor Us?
CLICK HERE to contact us.